‘Quantum of Solace’ — ‘Casino Royale’ It Is Not November 21, 2008

“Casino Royale” is an excellent film. I haven’t seen much James Bond outside of Pierce Brosnan (of which only “GoldenEye” is worth remembering), but “Casino Royale” was something different. It was just a damn good movie, and Daniel Craig proved Bond didn’t have to be just a sarcastic womanizer.

Unfortunately, “Quantum of Solace” is not nearly as interesting as Craig’s debut role as 007. It’s not his fault; he doesn’t have much to work with in the sequel. “Quantum” feels very much like the action-oriented second-part in a trilogy that was started with “Casino Royale,” but as someone who rarely pays for a movie in theater (thanks, Netflix!), I expect something a little more ambitious. “Quantum” struck me as a made-for-TV Bond flick on the big screen.

It didn’t help that you needed an intimate knowledge of the events and characters in “Casino Royale,” a movie I saw over a year ago, to have any pay-off with the subplots in “Quantum.” That’s partially my fault, I suppose, but when Bond movies have always been self-contained adventures, it wouldn’t have hurt to have “Quantum” provide a little context for the reader. Not to say “Quantum”‘s plot isn’t likely to seem convoluted even with context.

But still, Craig embodies the role of Bond and all he needs is a killer script the next time out. It’s just too bad we have to wait a few years before we, hopefully, see another glimpse at the greatness in “Casino Royale.”

Oh, and fire whoever thought Jack White was a good pick for the theme song — and I like Jack White. Seriously, yikes.